Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 15 Feb 1989

Vol. 122 No. 1

Urban Renewal Designation Programme: Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That Seanad Éireann congratulates the Minister for the Environment on the Urban Renewal Designation Programme and considers that he should extend it to other suitable towns.

—(Senator Fitzsimons.)

Mrs. Bulbulia

At the outset I would like to say how amazed I am by the wording of this motion. It is rather flattering or sycophantic in style and it certainly is extremely crass because the introduction of the Urban Renewal Designation Programme of course occurred during the last Administration. While the Minister may wish to be congratulated upon it, I expect he will admit to the fact, in replying to the debate, that it was an initiative of the previous Administration and not anything for which the Minister can accept total and complete credit. It is important to put that on the record. I was also interested to see that the first spokesman for Fianna Fáil, Senator Fitzsimons, had the good grace to put that fact on the record also.

I would like to say that coming from Waterford and being a member of Waterford City Council we have nothing but praise for the inner city designation and the urban renewal programme because we are one of the areas which is designated and is benefiting and stands to benefit from this programme. It was introduced in the 1986 Finance Act by the then Minister for Finance, Deputy Alan Dukes. It followed through with the Urban Renewal Act, 1986, which was introduced into this House and indeed the Dáil by the then Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Deputy Fergus O'Brien. It was designed to give financial incentives in designated areas in the five borough counties. Initially Waterford, and indeed Galway, found themselves left out in the announcement of the programme. Since we in Waterford were involved in compulsory purchase orders and in the assembling of sites in the inner city area in the hope that we would be mentioned, it was with some dismay we found we were not included in the first announcement. Of course we made very vigorous representations, and having Cabinet representation I expect did not go amiss. Very soon afterwards Waterford was included in the inner city designation and we have been doing great things down there since that happened.

The financial incentives I speak about were, of course, tax allowances and remission of rates both of which are extremely attractive to developers and, hopefully, will act as a spur to renewal of inner city core areas many of which have been subject to blight and dereliction in so many centres in our community. The 1987 Finance Act extended the designation and special incentives to Athlone, Castlebar, Dundalk, Kilkenny, Letterkenny, Sligo, Tralee, Tullamore and Wexford. I am sure all of these areas will actively seek developers and will ensure that for the period of the designation as much development and renewal as possible takes place.

It is important to state that while Government have come up with the imaginative idea and placed the package before the people it is largely up to the local authorities to get out there and market this is a viable and attractive proposition. Certainly in Waterford we were not behind the door when it came to shining our light and attracting developers to come in and look at our city centre and become part of our development plans and our urban renewal.

The policy in Waterford could be described as aggressive, interventionist and active. We in the city council acquired by compulsory purchase orders two major critical decayed blocks in the very commercial centre of Waterford. We are attempting to give that city a heart transplant. We are confident we will be able to achieve this. We ran into certain difficulties. Because these sites were in the centre of the city and in the core area, it was more or less anticipated that we would run into archaeological remains. This did happen. I know that my colleague, Senator Eogan, spoke about this the last day. He has been involved in some way. We received very little other than lip service by way of practical help in the work on the archaeology but the developer was so keen to get involved and to develop the sites quickly that he made a major contribution towards that work. That is something of a headline and I hope it sets a trend.

Many developers, probably rightfully, have earned a certain disdain among the general public because they have been seen as not particularly philanthropic, sensitive or aware and more interested in the capitalist or commercial aspects of developing. The developers involved in the development in Waterford were certainly civilised and generous to an extraordinary degree and I would like to place on the record acknowledgement of that generosity and positive quality.

Also in Waterford we have secured the advice of one of Ireland's premier consultants in the area of inner city renewal and design: I refer to Patrick Shaffrey. He has come to us and indeed has spoken to the council on many occasions and has drawn up a blueprint for what is acceptable design and shopfront and lay-out in the city centre. Anybody who has not been to Waterford for some time and who comes now to see it is very taken with and struck by the obvious improvements which have taken place. It is visually attractive and these improvements are quite visible. The threshold of what is acceptable has been raised. Quite spontaneously, shop owners and people who are interested in renovating their properties have come forward with quality wooden shopfronts and with distinctive advertising signs. One hopes it is the end to neon, glitz and glitter which was considered acceptable perhaps in the fifties or early sixties when we did not have a particularly tasteful approach to these things. Now certainly there is a marked aesthetic improvement. Not everything, of course, has been accomplished but there is certainly a marked raising of consciousness of what should be done and of what is acceptable and desirable.

We in Waterford have also engaged ourselves in a pedestrianisation project. It has changed the whole ambience of the city. In particular, I refer to an area known popularly and fondly as Red Square because it has been paved, I hasten to add in red blocks. There people tend to gather, street musicians play there, there is some vending of flowers and there is carol singing. The whole atmosphere of the city centre has become enlivened and is attractive. It has been referred to as having something of the flavour or air of an Italian piazza. It is part of the inner city urban renewal and is very attractive indeed. It is interesting to see in that immediate area window boxes appearing and a general air of a promising future about the place.

To return to the CPO sites, they are in the heart of Waterford and they contain one acre in site one and one and a half acres in site two. Site one is in the Lady Lane/Peter Street area and site two in the Peter Street/Olaf Street area. The problems arose in getting these sites together of people who had title. They needed to be persuaded to part. There were also difficulties with old age pensioners and people who had an entrenched, deeply held and a strongly rooted commitment to the area. They needed certain persuasion and rehousing. All in all it took time, patience, effort and energy to assemble these two sites.

I would again make reference to the archaeology. These sites which were compulsorily purchased were in the inner city. They, of course, were built over the old historic Danish town and, in fact, when excavation work began in order to prepare the sites for building the remains of an old historic church, St. Peter's Church, were found buried under the site. Again a tribute is due to the sensitivity of the developers in question. This site and this ruin of St. Peter's Church is going to be incorporated into the design and plan for the new shopping centre and is going to be visible within the centre to all who come. It will be glassed over and the shopping centre itself will be above the site of the church. It should be an extremely attractive focal point and feature of what will be a smart modern shopping centre. It will give recognition to Waterford's ancient past and will become part of the tourist trail in the inner city.

Obviously if you come across a major archaeological find, as we did in Waterford, you run into problems vis-à-vis the time constraint imposed by the designation and programme. We were very gratified indeed to find that tight deadline extended. That was a practical recognition of the difficutlies (a) in selling the idea and getting it across to people and attracting developers, and (b) for people like us in Waterford who had come up against the archaeology and want to do the decent thing — buy it and explore it and have it held for post-excavation work. Certainly the extension of the time deadline was of major assistance.

Tenders were invited for the development of the site. We had very clear objectives, very clear design criteria and major thought went into traffic circulation, services and access routes. What we wanted, and we were very clear indeed about this, was the best possible redevelopment for the city. It had to take place within the shortest timespan possible and it needed to bring about the greatest financial return to Waterford City Council. We are having very little residential content in the scheme but what we want is a large scale comprehensive retail shopping scheme with a high standard of architectural design.

There is one thing I would like to mention and I would be interested if the Minister would comment on it in his reply. When you do something good, useful and worthwhile it very often has a knock-on effect and bothers other people. It is not always all good news. Those people who are outside the designated areas, of course, are suddenly finding themselves in a less competitive situation than those who will be trading in the designated area. This kind of unhappiness has surfaced in many areas, not least in Waterford. The people outside the designated area are paying rates and taxes and they are, in effect, subsidising their competitors trading in favoured so-called compounds or designated areas.

There is the possibility and I have heard it mentioned, of a constitutional challenge which might be mounted against the Minister by people who find themselves suddenly disfavoured and who would claim that perhaps this decision has in some way interfered with free market forces and with the marketplace in a direct way. I would be interested to hear what the Minister has to say by way of comment on that because it certainly seems to me that they have a certain legitimate grievance and their trading is suddenly less favoured than those in the designated area. I am particularly thinking of some people who in a very innovative fashion in Waterford developed a major shopping complex at great personal expense and without all the incentives.

Be that as it may, my party obviously are happy about the motion even though we feel that perhaps it congratulates the wrong Minister for the Environment. However, we are pleased to see that this policy has been followed through and we hope that more and more towns will become involved and rid themselves of derelection, blight and decay and become vital living centres again.

Mr. Mooney

Senator Bulbulia may be pleased to know that I, too, share the initial comments of my distinguished colleague Senator Fitzsimons when he talked about congratulating the Minister only for the fact that in looking through the report in relation to this motion, I found a rather interesting comment from our then Environment spokesman in the Dáil when the then Minister of State at the Department of the Environment introduced the Urban Renewal Bill. Deputy Burke said that he was surprised to see the Bill coming before the House at that time having waited four years for it to be introduced. Deputy Burke went on to say that it was the then Fianna Fáil Government as far back as 1978 who established a special interdepartmental committee on the development of a new approach to urban renewal. He said it was also Fianna Fáil who advanced the first comprehensive plan for urban development when we published our Urban Development Areas Bill of 1982 and the Dublin Inner City Development Authority Bill of 1982. He said that the Bill introduced by Minister of State that day was clearly inspired by those Fianna Fáil efforts but that, as with the Government's plans for house renovation, there were glaring, unacceptable and indefensible ommissions.

To put the matter in context I feel that the wording in congratulating the Minister is correct in the circumstances and I would be the first to congratulate the former Minister in the Coalition. Indeed, I would have been happy to do so because of the fact that this legislation is so relevant and has been further strengthened by this Administration. I would have been even more happy to have congratulated the Opposition because they introduced so much legislation that met with widespread approval during their term in office.

My main interest in this motion is, in a sense, to be somewhat parochial. Having listened to Senator Bulbulia and having looked at other contributions to this debate last week I know that Senators have tended to centre quite correctly on the areas in which they have the most expertise, in the areas in which they live and the areas which they represent. We in County Leitrim are excluded from such deliberations because there is no town in my county designated under this Bill. The nearest to us is in Sligo and coming from the constituency of Sligo-Leitrim I welcome the designation of Sligo town under the Urban Renewal Bill. Anyone who visited Sligo in the past year or two will have noticed it has meant improvements in the aesthetic look of the town and long may it continue. Sligo is designated as an economic growth centre and can only benefit my own county of Leitrim, particularly the northern end.

The success rate of the Urban Renewal Bill in its component parts is evident from the contributions from all sides of the House last week and by Senator Bulbulia in speaking about the historic city of Waterford. The legislation has had approval from all sides of the House.

I should like to propose to the Minister that he consider the town of Carrick-on-Shannon being included as part of the urban renewal scheme. The motion calls for consideration to be given to extending the urban renewal designation programmes to other suitable towns. I intend, briefly, to attempt to justify why I believe the county town of Leitrim — the smallest county town, the smallest administrative unit in the country — should be considered for this extension.

Leitrim, like many of the Border counties, has suffered intolerably since the foundation of the State, primarily as a result of Partition. The hinterland of Leitrim — Fermanagh, Cavan, Monaghan and Armagh, and parts of Tyrone — being cut off geographically, militarily, politically and economically has meant a serious economic decline in many of the towns, in Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan. To a lesser extent Donegal and Louth have been affected although I am sure my colleagues from those areas might differ with me on that point. It is evident in Leitrim as a whole that the economic decline which set in from Partition — resulting in a population at that time of 127,000 people being reduced, according to the most recent census, to 27,000 — has had a major effect on the life and spirit of the people who live there.

I am not asking that Carrick-on-Shannon be included simply because it is the correct or proper thing to say; I am asking that it be included because of right. It is a town of less than 2,000 people but it is the administrative centre of the county and if we are ever to have a chance of breaking the cycle of economic decline in our county then measures such as those contained in the Urban Renewal Designation Programme will go some way towards redressing the balance without any great extra cost to the Exchequer.

In recent years the impact of the International Fund for Ireland was seen as perhaps being an answer to some of the economic ills of the Border counties. Sadly, that has not been the case. Indeed, I would go further and condemn unreservedly the attitude that was adopted by the Department of the Environment in the northern part of this country, in the manner in which they expended the funds given to their care under the International Fund for Ireland. One of its categories is urban enhancement. This means that towns throughout the Six Counties and the Border counties would be eligible for funding to enhance the urban environment, to protect the listed and historic buildings and to generally improve the aesthetic look of the centre of our towns.

Because of the mandate given to the International Fund for Ireland three-quarters of its funding had, by statute, to be dispensed in the Six Counties, with the remaining quarter coming to the South. Even a cursory glance at the report of the International Fund for Ireland, in the context of urban enhancement, will show that there is no comparison between the amounts of money given to some towns in the Six Counties, and the amounts of money given to towns of equivalent size in the South.

To be more specific, I would be the first to accept that towns such as Strabane and Tyrone have suffered horribly as a result of the cycle of violence in the Six Counties over the past 20 years and deserve and should receive as much money for urban enhancement as is possible. However, I find it very difficult to accept that the town of Enniskillen which, within the region I am talking about, has not only maintained a successful trading pattern since the foundation of this State but, despite the troubles, has managed to suck in people from across the Border — from Sligo, Donegal, Leitrim and Cavan — and in so doing has created an oasis of affluence in a region of economic despair, should be treated in the same way. That is one of the reasons I am asking that Carrick-on-Shannon should be included in this programmes. Under the International Fund for Ireland, in the urban enhancement category, only three towns in Leitrim were included; Carrick-on-Shannon was tagged on at the end, Manorhamilton and Ballinamore being the other two. There has been little or no manifestation of the benefits that one expected would flow from this categorisation, in other words, we got no money.

In order to encourage industrial development in a county like Leitrim it needs some extra incentives. I shall put forward a hypothesis. If the Minister or any of my colleagues here had an entreprenurial spirit and wished to set up business in the mid-north-west region I believe the last place they would wish to set up at the moment would be in County Leitrim, because the advantages that attach to other counties surrounding us would be far more attractive. Sligo town is part of the urban renewal designation programme. Longford has a very strong traditional and successful trading pattern, a town with a much larger population than Carrick-on-Shannon. Cavan, to our east, is another strong and successful trading town.

What chance is there for any of the towns in County Leitrim, where the county town being the largest has fewer than 2,000 people, to attract suitable industry or suitable investment? If the Urban Renewal Designation Programme were to be Extended to Carrick-on-Shannon — I have no objections to it being extended to other towns in the county, not least my own town of Drumshambo — immediately we would have the extra edge I believe is necessary for us to provide much needed employment. It certainly would created an initial stimulus. It would restore a spirit and dignity to our people that has been eroded over the past number of years and certainly over the past few generations as they have watched their sons and daughters take the emigrant ship.

One statistic springs to mind. County Leitrim has only 25 of the top companies in Ireland. That figure on its own perhaps means little, but compare it with Dublin, where there are almost 7,000 top companies, and you begin to see the picture. Our people are leaving in vast numbers and there is a need to arrest that decline. This particular programme seems to be a tangible effort to arrest it.

I was particularly interested to hear Senator Bulbulia — and other contributors to this debate — direct her attention to frontages and to the hope that more and more of our towns and Villages would take a look at the proliferation of neon plastic signs which have so blighted our environment over the past number of years. I readily accept that many traders, in the difficult economic climate that we have been operating in over the past ten years, will go for what they see to be the cheapest and most impressive sign. If you put a coloured sign and a bright light over you door, particularly in a rural environment it will be seen for miles around and, after all. the whole object of the exercise is to attract more customers. However, I would appeal to those people and indeed to the people of my own county to give serious consideration to replacing their neon signs with more traditional shopfronts.

Kilkenny is an example of what can be done. It is correct that we should constantly remind people of what Kilkenny has done. I know other towns and cities are following that trend but I hope the message could go out from here that in a way neon signs are counterproductive and that for us with our long history of separateness and a heritage and cultural identify we are proud of, the restoration of older traditional shopfronts would fit in very well and would be a marvellous tourist boost.

I congratulate the Minister for the Environment. I believe that his commitment to urban renewal is unsurpassed. The commitment of the Fianna Fáil Party, both in and out of Government, has been shown to be one of activity in this area. I will finish my contribution by once again asking that, in the spirit of the motion in extending this scheme to other suitable towns, the Minister will not forget lovely Leitrim.

Mr. Hogan

I am very pleased to be able to speak on the motion. It has brought speakers to their feet to give vehement and emphatic testimony to the developments that have taken place in Kilkenny city and the surrounding areas of Kilkenny over the past 15 years or so. It shows the tremendous amount urban renewal can do to create a very lively and cosmopolitan atmosphere in a rural city like Kilkenny. It can develop an atmosphere which is very conducive to foreign tourism.

People in Kilkenny city and county have over the years become justifiably very proud of and pleased with the rehabilitation process that has taken place over the past 15 years or so. In the late seventies with the coming to Kilkenny of our present county manager, Mr. Donnelly, he realised that Kilkenny had all the hallmarks of a city that could be beautiful; the traditional shopfronts could be a major feature of an important streetscape development and it had enormous potential to become a very vibrant place and a great attraction to foreign tourists in particular. He adopted a plan. The names of architects like Shaffrey and Thompson have become synonymous, in conjunction with the engineering staff and officials of Kilkenny County Council and Kilkenny Corporation, with bringing about a tremendous revitalisation and rehabilitation of that area. The leadership that was shown in Kilkenny in instituting a programme of urban renewal at a time when there was very little concept of what those words meant is characteristic of the vision that was shown by the county manager and his staff.

The modern-day uses that have now become part of the rehabilitation process in Kilkenny and the revitalisation of the old buildings is setting a headline for other cities and other large towns. For example, there is Rathe House which houses the Kilkenny Museum, the Shee Almshouse which is a 14th century building which houses the Kilkenny Tourist Information Office. In recent times the old stables of Kilkenny Castle were used by Kilkenny Design Workshops which was formerly a semi-State organisation and which is now held in public ownership under the auspices of Kilkenny Civic Trust. The Butler family have been very closely associated with the history of Kilkenny. Many of the historic buildings in Kilkenny city bear the name and insigna of the Butlers in connection with developments that happened in the 13th and 14th centuries when that family were in their heyday.

An example of what can be done in preserving the old and making modern-day use of the buildings we have in order to enhance their beauty is epitomised by the successful transition of the Kilkenny Design Workshops building into the ownership of the Kilkenny Civic Trust. I want to put on record my appreciation of the work that was carried out by the County and City Manager, Mr. Donnelly, together with a user group and the business people, in particular Avonmore Creameries, Smithwicks, Mahon and McPhilips and such industries that recognise the importance of keeping in public ownership facilities like the buildings I have referred to for the use of the general public and for the use of the business and commercial life of the city of Kilkenny.

The local authorities, Kilkenny Corporation and Kilkenny County Council have subscribed generously to bringing that situation about but it would not have come to a successful conclusion, as far as the people were concerned, were it not for the generous contribution made by the local business community to the financial package that was necessary to keep that particular building in the hands of the local people and to ensure that future generations would not look back on it and wonder what were the public representatives and authorities and the people generally in Kilkenny doing to allow such a building into private ownership and run the risk of it being put to a use that would not be in keeping with the aesthetic surroundings of Kilkenny city and county.

To go further afield, Professor Eogan put his finger on it when he said during this debate that urban renewal is not about architecture and building; it is also about improving the quality of life for the people. This is very evident in the context of Kilkenny and the pride that has developed in the local people.

The various steps that Ministers for the Environment take in relation to litter may be difficult to implement if there is a drab and very difficult atmosphere and if people do not have pride in their city. No matter what initiative a Minister takes to bring about greater efforts in litter control and the elimination of derelict sites, his task is more difficult if there is not public pride in the area. Generally, we can say that the enhancement of Kilkenny ensures the necessary pride and incentives to guarantee that the strides that have been made over the past ten or 15 years will not be diminished in the future.

Often when I come to Dublin and see the developments that have taken place in our main thoroughfares in O'Connell Street in particular, with plastic signs and no planning whatsoever in relation to what commercial outlet is located in any particular unit in that street, I wonder what planning, if any, was undertaken in order to ensure that probably the most important and historical street in our country should not be allowed to develop in such a haphazard and ill-planned way. The former Minister for the Environment, Deputy Boland, in setting up the Metropolitan Streets Commission showed initiative in trying to ensure that O'Connell Street and the general city centre of Dublin, our capital city, would be worthy of our heritage. He showed his heart was in the right place in trying to undo the bad planning that had taken place over the years in that context and that the buildings would be renewed and rehabilitated to ensure that we could be justifiably proud of the centre of our capital city.

In the context of urban renewal I also welcome the recent publication by the Minister of the Derelict Sites Bill. All of us, not only in large cities but in every rural town and village, can identify the blight on our landscapes and streetscapes because of the amount of dereliction we see. While there are difficulties on the capital budget side of our Exchequer finances at the moment, more incentives could be given and I suppose one could say more of the carrot-and-the-big-stick treatment could be applied to ensure that the urban renewal programmes in our rural towns and villages would gather momentum and bring about a rehabilitation of old buildings, get them out of decay and into modern-day use by the various landlords and owners of such property. People want to live in their own locality and they would prefer, in my opinion, to live in rural towns and villages if they got some incentive to get those derelict sites into an acceptable and attractive shape. It would do a lot for local pride and for the tidiness and general beauty of many of those towns and villages.

In my opinion urban renewal incentives can give a distorted view and a distorted incentive to multiple outlets. There is always a fear that various mutiple grocery and supermarket outlets, if given incentives, will take up the main portion of an inner city and displace small family shops, small family grocers and similar trades. People who have given a lifetime to developing the family business could now, through no fault of their own, but through unfair competition sparked by various urban renewal incentives, slip into decay and go out of business.

In Kilkenny, an area was designated as part of an urban renewal programme. I am not quite sure of the criteria by which the Department laid down the boundaries as to what would and would not qualify in terms of the incentives given by the Department of the Environment but I found it very strange that certain properties were excluded and that properties on each side, would actually be part of the urban renewal programme. Despite my representations to the local authority, I think that it is regrettable that two buildings in particular of families that formed the heart of business life in Kilkenny city over the years were excluded from whatever incentives were to be given to their neighbours on each side of them.

I know that the Crotty and de Loughrey properties have become subject of local debate over the past number of months since the announcement of this urban renewal boundary for the city of Kilkenny. I appeal to the Minister to have these particular properties reinvestigated in the context of any extension he may be considering to the urban renewal scheme throughout the country. It is hard to explain to local people why, if the properties bounding them on all sides are actually included in the scheme, their properties are omitted; it is very difficult to explain that. Political reasons have been put forward. You may be nodding in agreement with me, Minister, but there were political reasons for leaving the buildings out——

Minister for the Environment (Mr. Flynn)

There were not.

Mr. Hogan

I think I may have touched a nerve but part of the urban renewal incentives meant that there were boundaries to be created and boundaries to be decided in relation to who and would not qualify for those particular incentives. If neighbouring properties are qualifying, I cannot understand for the life of me why properties which are dead straight in the middle of that area are not qualifying for that particular aid. I know that the Minister will be glad to review that situation in the context of what the motion is saying here tonight and to include those properties so that we will not have any explanations to make to the local people who find themselves ill-treated in that way.

Finally, I certainly want to welcome the motion here this evening. I think the previous Government showed remarkable foresight in bringing forward a scheme of urban renewal incentives and that the developments we see taking place throughout all our major towns and villages are an example of what can be done in selectivity promoting districts in order to create more life and more activity in our inner cities.

I want to thank the Members for their kind words in relation to Kilkenny City. I know it has been treated as a showpiece and as an example of what can be achieved in a small area through imaginative planning and architectural sensitivity. I know that representatives from many parts of the country have come to see and visit Kilkenny and they are always welcome to see the type of work that is being carried out there. Even though I suggest that the good that is being initiated will be continued, I would certainly support the extension of that particular scheme to other towns and villages in the country.

Mr. Cassidy

I shall be brief. I just want to welcome this motion. I think it is a very good motion, and the spirit of the discussion here and the contributions that have been made to it have testified to this. It is practically unanimously agreed that this programme be extended to all other areas.

I suppose the motion would be pointless if it is not job-creating or if it is not making space for extra jobs in premises or giving extra services to the community in areas that were not attractive up to now for people to invest in. I want to specifically mention Westmeath and the approach road coming from the airport into the capital city here in Dublin. We all know the new look the airport has had over the past number of years and the massive improvements the Department of the Environment have presided over in relation to the approach roads to our city. When we drive in from the airport now it is as good as anything we can find in most other countries, better, as a matter of fact than anything in Europe. This great new approach to the city is absolutely fabulous until you hit parts of Dorset Street and it is there that I think this Urban Renewal Bill could play its part to the fullest.

That Dorset Street belt then goes on and it takes up again at Capel Street which takes you right onto the quays. We can see because of the Urban Renewal Bill — and the Department and the Minister are to be complimented on this — that the property on the quays that has been lying there for the past 20 years is now in such demand that the people who have been offered the various different sites have been offered a profit without even putting a foot on the site. I happen to know two of the consortia involved. Now an area which was classified — as it was — in the film world as the best place in Europe to make pre-war films — suddenly, mainly because of this piece of legislation, has become one of the most attractive places for investment in the city centre. That must be said in favour of the urban renewal plan we have here before us tonight. All the signs are there of massive job creation in construction on the quays within the next three months.

Having said that, if we come back up Dorset Street we meet a derelict road coming from Parnell Square which links Dorset Street, a road called Granby Row. It is probably the most derelict road north of the Liffey and I reside there most of the week. That road is not included and is a link road with all the great work that has been done in Parnell Square by the corporation in relation to beautiful pavements and signs. We have all these lovely brown signs with white lettering telling you where the different places of tourist interest may be found. It has been totally co-ordinated; it is a pleasure to walk around there and in the Garden of Remembrance. But Granby Row should be included. It is not included and I know two consortia that would create a minimum of 40 jobs if this incentive were applied there. That option is open and available at the present time. I know they will not invest in that area if an incentive like this is not available because they can move somewhere else and place their investment elsewhere. It is a tremendous opportunity which should not be lost because north of the Liffey is a difficult place at the best of times. Tourists are taken into the city by coaches which park at Trinity College. They are taken around all the beautiful areas such as the Westbury Centre and all the walk-around streets but north of the Liffey there are only two or three tourist attractions and that is the area I would like to mention.

Finally, I would like to indicate our situation in north Westmeath. It is extremely difficult to attract tourists or investment or industry to north Westmeath because it is bordering on counties which are classified as disadvantaged areas and there are additional grants for those areas. It is for that reason that I would like to see Mullingar classified as a disadvantaged area. Very few streets in Mullingar could be classified as derelict but there are one or two streets where investment and jobs could be created. I welcome the motion and I look forward to an extension of the programme.

Minister for the Environment (Mr. Flynn)

At home and abroad, the image of Ireland has been as a predominantly rural country. This is no surprise, given the important economic and social position of agriculture in the development of the country down the years. While agriculture and rural-based initiatives still bulk large in the country's life, there is no doubt that we are increasingly becoming an urban-based society. The last two or three decades have seen a steady and substantial flow of people from rural to urban areas. The reasons for this trend are many, the most notable being improved transport and communications, mechanisation of many rural based activities, general increase in industrialisation, centralisation of many activities and so on. The results of this movement are evidenced by the fact that the greater Dublin area alone now account for nearly one-third of the national population.

This considerable movement of people towards our towns and cities coincided with, and indeed reinforced, a trend towards suburbanisation. We are far more aware today both from our own experience and from that of other countries that policies which support urban growth through greenfield development and a sprawling process of suburbanisation can give rise to many social, economic and environmental problems. Large parts of what were formerly thriving central areas become run-down and derelict. The malady of dereliction and decay is one which spreads and which can affect large portions of our towns and cities, rendering them unattractive for private sector development and often consigning particular locations to ghettoes and no-go areas. The problem is one which must be tackled and tackled with vigour and imagination. The Government are meeting the challenge and have, through their various programmes, grasped the nettle of urban decline.

A special urban renewal programme was set in motion in 1986 by the Urban Renewal Act, 1986. This Act introduced two very important initiatives; the establishment of the Custom House Docks Development Authority and the designated areas scheme of urban renewal. The Custom House Docks Development Authority (CHDDA) was established with powers of land acquisition, borrowing and planning control with a mandate to secure the redevelopment of a 27 acre site on the Custom House Docks. The area as defined in the Urban Renewal Act, 1986 originally consisted principally of Connolly Railway Station, the Central Sorting Office and the Custom House Docks site owned by Dublin Port and Docks Board.

I have made two orders under the Urban Renewal (Amendment) Act, 1987 extending the Custom House area. The first order in July, 1987 extended the original area to the centre of the River Liffey thereby maximising the potential of the site's riverside location. In May, 1988 I made a second order extending the area in an easterly direction, so as to facilitate the development of the proposed National Sports Centre.

Since its establishment in November, 1986, the Authority has made considerable strides towards securing an innovative and comprehensive redevelopment of the site. The development will include the International Financial Services Centre, office, residential and retail accommodation, museums, hotel and conference centre.

Starting with the acquisition of the site in March, 1987 the Authority proceeded to publish the planning scheme which formed the basis for the development. From the many interesting and competitive proposals put forward the Hard-wicke-McInerney — British Land Consortium was selected by the Authority to carry out the project involving an investment of some £250 million.

Legal arrangements with the developer were completed in January last year. The Taoiseach laid the foundation stone for the Financial Services Centre last September. Since then progress on the building of the west block has advanced at a very fast rate indeed. Work on the foundations and basement of the south and north blocks of the centre has commenced. It is hoped to begin work on the residential element of the project before the end of this year.

The Custom House Docks site enjoys the benefits of the financial incentives under the urban renewal scheme together with a special favourable rate of corporation tax for international financial services. The Government have energetically promoted the development both at home and abroad. More important, we have succeeded in creating and stabilising an economic climate such as to make this development possible.

The Custom House Docks project, when completed, will have enormous spin-off benefits and will serve to encourage and promote the further development of the whole north inner city area. While the Custom House Docks development will go some way towards the revitalisation of Dublin the Government are keenly aware that other measures and initiatives are necessary if we are to erase the blight of decay and derelection in our towns and cities.

The Government cannot, however, hope to solve the problem alone. One of the most important measures therefore is to involve the private sector in the regeneration process. This is being achieved through the designated areas scheme of urban renewal. Under this scheme a wide and valuable range of incentives is being made available for the construction and refurbishment of property within specified areas. Briefly these incentives are as follows:

A tax allowance on expenditure of a capital nature on the construction or reconstruction of commercial buildings;

A double rent allowance against income for traders and professionals leasing these buildings;

A taxation allowance on expenditure on the building or improvement of a dwelling for owner-occupation and

A remission of rates in respect of new or refurbished buildings.

Under the Urban Renewal Act, 1986, and the Finance Act, 1986, these incentives were made available in specified areas in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Galway. The local authorities involved were charged with publicising the scheme and with assisting in the promotion of development projects as well as carrying out environmental improvements in the designated areas.

Having witnessed the success of the scheme in the original areas I made an order on 9 May 1988 extending it to a further nine towns. These were: Athlone, Castlebar, Dundalk, Kilkenny, Letterkenny, Sligo, Tralee, Tullamore and Wexford. I also made some small additions to the Dublin designated area to facilitate the development of a major commercial centre proposed for Bachelors Walk and also to the Limerick designated area.

In last year's budget it was announced that an area in and around the proposed Tallaght Town centre would be designated for the urban renewal incentives. Once agreement was reached between the developer and Dublin Corporation, I made an order on 14 November 1988 designating an area of some 120 acres in Tallaght. This area included part of the existing Tallaght village. Senators will be glad to know that work on the much needed and long-awaited town centre started last month and is due for completion in two years.

An important aspect of the urban renewal scheme overall is that it is not open-ended. A cut-off date for qualifying expenditure under the scheme has been fixed by statute at 31 May, 1991. Benefit is only available for construction expenditure incurred and leases executed before that date. Developers are aware of the closing date and will have to decide in the very near future whether or not they intend to partake in the scheme. I do not propose to extend this deadline as to do so could put many much needed projects, now at advanced planning stages, on the back burner for a number of years.

With over two years still to go before the deadline, the scheme has already enjoyed considerable success in promoting development in many of the centres designated. While it may be unfair to single out specific successes of the scheme I think that the following developments are worthy of note.

The scheme in Galway took off within months of its introduction and progress has been conspicuous since then. Almost all available property within the designated area has already been taken up. Derelict sites have been replaced with fine new buildings, disused warehouses have been refurbished, residential development have returned to the inner city and new commercial developments have been attracted to the city.

In Galway developments involving 43 retail outlets with a total floor area of almost 40,000 square feet, 35 town houses with an overall floor area of 23,500 square feet and office space amounting to a total of 33,000 square feet have already been completed. Other proposals representing further investment of £10 million are planned, including a cultural centre at Spanish Arch comprising a theatre, museum and exhibition centre.

In Limerick many fine developments have been carried out in the designated areas. Projects with a value of some £23 million have already been completed or are in progress in the city. These projects include the major development at Arthurs Quay involving a new supermarket, shopping units, multi-storey car park and office and residential accommodation and also the new Limerick Civic Centre, which consists of civic offices, a municipal museum and courthouse facilities. Further projects at a total estimated cost of approximately £18 million are at various stages of planning.

In Dublin the urban renewal scheme was initially somewhat slow to show results. In the last year the picture has changed dramatically in the Dublin Quays designated area, particularly in the vicinity of Christchurch. As Senator Doyle mentioned in this House last Wednesday evening, there were no new developments along the quays between 1975 and 1986. Since the introduction of the scheme however development involving investment of some £40 million is now either completed, in progress or about to start along the quays.

In Wexford the scheme is also set to be a considerable success with a very attractive blend of developments proposed. The developments will include commercial, residential, civic and recreational projects, together with an imaginative project involving the restoration of the Town Wall and Medieval Tower to provide museum and craft workshops.

I have referred to the success of the scheme in Galway, Limerick, Dublin and Wexford to illustrate what has, and what can be, achieved. The scheme has also proved to be a marked success in many of the other designated areas. I am also quietly confident that Castlebar will also produce major redevelopment and I am pleased that this will take place in the older part of the town. I will say no more on this for the present except that the development is assured.

Our cities and towns benefit from many schemes in addition to the designated area programme. In the late seventies the then Fianna Fáil Government established an interdepartmental committee to report on and make recommendations to deal with the particularly acute problems of the Dublin inner city area. This group, which received funds from central Government towards recreational, educational and job creation projects in the inner city, helped in identifying many of the problems associated with urban decay.

The perception of an area plays a very important part in its development. Improving an area's image by improving the environment and housing stock can act as a catalyst for attracting new investment. In promoting urban renewal we must therefore create "living" urban centres, that is places where people want to live, work and spend their leisure time.

Local authorities for their part have been to the forefront in the provision of new good quality infill housing in urban areas. Dublin Corporation, for example, have since 1982 provided nearly 1,300 new dwellings as part of a major programme of inner city housing. Generally these new housing developments have taken place on sites which were formerly disused or rundown. These developments have made a significant contribution to halting the decline of the areas involved.

In the future I will continue to place emphasis on providing small infill housing schemes integrated with existing communities and services. However, the great need now is to encourage private housing developments in inner city areas and I was greatly heartened to see recent reports of private housing developments planned for Ellis Quay. This has to be a major milestone in the redevelopment of inner Dublin as a living city. Indeed the interest shown in the recent Fisherman's Wharf housing development on the quays at York Road where all the houses were sold on the first morning, shows that people's perception of the city is changing.

This, however, is only a modest beginning and I hope that the incentives for owner occupiers to acquire accommodation in the designated areas and the "Section 23" incentives for private rented accommodation which are available generally throughout the country will generate significant new private housing developments in urban areas.

The Government also recognise the fact that many existing older local authority housing schemes and flat complexes located in urban centres throughout the country are run down and in need of refurbishment. We have, therefore, developed and expanded the remedial works scheme for local authority houses which was introduced in 1985 and the provision for this purpose, which has been more than doubled in the past two years, is £15 million in 1989.

Twenty-nine urban authorities in all will receive funding under the scheme this year and the substantial increase in moneys available will mean that an extensive programme of works can be carried out which will complement urban renewal projects already underway. Physical improvements to dwellings are only one aspect of the remedial works scheme. An essential aim, particularly in large urban estates, is the development of a greater emphasis on improved estate management and maintenance. I have, therefore, stressed to local authorities that particular importance must be placed on tenant involvement in running their estates as a means of combating the social problems which have often contributed to the deterioration of the estates and also to ensure that the improvements brought about by the scheme are maintained in the long term.

Another essential facet of the scheme is the obligation on local authorities to carry out environmental improvement works to estates being refurbished; well thought out programmes of works in this regard can contribute substantially to improving the overall environment and are of special value in urban areas. I am confident that the remedial works programme, which extends far beyond the existing designated area boundaries, will make a major contribution to the whole process of urban renewal.

In 1987, in order to maximise the potential for urban renewal involving a number of various different interests, the Government approved a proposal for the National Building Agency to undertake certain redevelopment works bringing together local authority, private and voluntary interests. The Agency's role is not, of course, confined to the designated areas.

The Agency have built up a close working relationship with local authorities, Government Departments and the construction industry over 25 years and are uniquely placed to carry out a central co-ordinating role in relation to urban renewal. While the Agency's main area of operation had been local authority housing, they had increasingly shown their ability to diversify having been involved in projects on behalf of bodies such as Clashganna Mills Trust in Carlow and the Grapevine Arts Centre in Dublin. In addition to their experience of major construction projects the Agency had established a highly qualified and experienced urban design unit. Since 1987, significant progress has already been made by the agency with the following projects in the course of construction:

Westgate-Selskar, Wexford — including residential accommodation, a shop, a restaurant and the restoration of old Norman West Gate;

Douglas Street, Cork — an attractive residential development of 35 houses and flats which is being developed jointly by the Agency and a local builder;

Ormond Quay, Dublin — a very high standard office development which it is hoped will act as a catalyst to further development along the quays.

In addition, a major redevelopment in Dundalk is at an advanced planning stage.

The Government were aware that the Agency required additional resources to effectively discharge its new role. The Government, therefore, made available a £1 million revolving fund in the 1988 public capital programme to assist the funding of individual projects and a further £1 million has been allocated for the purpose in 1989. As projects are completed and sold off, the fund will be replenished allowing new projects to be undertaken elsewhere.

Yesterday I moved the Second Stage of a new Bill to deal with the problem of dereliction. The Derelict Sites Bill, 1989 will, when it becomes law, place a duty on the owners and occupiers of all land to take reasonable steps to ensure that the land does not become or does not continue to be a derelict site and it will be the duty of local authorities to ensure that this requirement is complied with.

The Bill also provides, subject to certain exemptions, for an annual levy on derelict sites in urban areas. Local authorities will be empowered to require measures to be taken in relation to derelict sites and heavy penalties will apply where these are not complied with. There is a need to take positive and aggressive action to effectively deal with the problem of dereliction. The Bill is aimed at giving local authorities the necessary legislative framework with which to tackle and control the problem.

One of the most important aspects of the proposed law is that it will also apply to local authorities themselves and other statutory bodies. It is time all public bodies got their act together to stamp out the unacceptable face of dereliction in our cities and towns.

Despite the overall level of achievement of the designated areas scheme I am concerned that a small number of the areas involved may not be living up to expectations. I hope the local authorities involved will step up their activity in this area by using whatever means are at their disposal to encourage private sector involvement and to ensure whereever possible smooth and expeditious use of their planning and compulsory land acquisition powers and functions.

One of the reasons the scheme has not been as successful in some areas is that some parts of the designated areas are environmentally unappealing and, despite the incentives available, are not perceived by developers as attractive locations for development. In order to overcome this difficulty, the Government announced in this year's budget that an allocation of £2 million would be made in 1989 to finance environmental infrastructural projects which will complement proposed private sector developments within the designated areas. They type of projects which I have in mind are pedestrianisation paving, attractive public lighting, creation of walkways, and other urban landscaping. Besides encouraging further development, these projects will greatly enhance the urban environment and should make our towns and cities more pleasant places in which to work and live. The planned environmental upgrading will also provide a boost for the areas concerned from the point of view of tourism.

In order to ensure that this fund will have the greatest possible impact in generating new development, it is intended that these environmental infrastructural projects will only be approved and undertaken in areas where there is already demonstrable development interest. A fund operated in this way will guarantee maximum return on State investment by copperfastening existing proposals and by encouraging and accelerating other private sector development which might not otherwise take place.

Experience in other countries has shown that urban redevelopment cannot be left wholly to the private sector and that selective public expenditure on environmental upgrading is an essential and effective element in promoting urban redevelopment. I am confident that investment of £2 million will represent only a fraction of the value of private sector development which will be generated.

The idea of designating specific and limited sized areas in each centre is to ensure that the maximum impact of the scheme is achieved in those areas which are most in need of redevelopment but which are likely to remain undeveloped unless special measures are taken. Designation of these selected areas focuses attention on these locations without having the effects of the scheme dissipated over too wide an area in any given town. It is important that the fruits of the urban renewal scheme are readily noticeable and publicised. This serves to generate interest in the scheme.

If large tracts of land or indeed whole towns were to be designated, the concentration of development in the desired locations would not be achieved. Just as the size of the areas in each of the towns involved must be limited so too must the number of towns involved. The towns already identified under the scheme have been selected having regard to their size, need for renewal, their geographical location and the potential for redevelopent.

Strong cases could and have been made for the extension of the scheme to many further towns throughout the country which are suffering from different degrees of dereliction. I am aware of the problems that exist. I have received hundreds of representations and deputations from individuals, private developers and indeed local authorities seeking designation of particular areas.

As Minister for the Environment I have to be satisfied that further designations will not adversely affect the progress being achieved in those towns which have already been identified as having the greatest need. If the scheme were to be extended in an unplanned and willy-nilly fashion this would be counterproductive not only adversely affecting towns already designated but also by slowing down or indeed halting developments in other areas with developers adopting a "wait and see" policy in the hope that particular areas in which they might have an interest would be designated. I am keeping the urban renewal scheme under constant review. The representations and submissions which have been made and the comments of Senators on this motion will be borne in mind as part of this review.

Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to Minister of State, Deputy Connolly, whose trojan work in promoting the scheme throughout the country has, in no small measure, been responsible for the success of the scheme. I would also like to thank all those who contributed to the debate.

Mr. Byrne

Can I have a few minutes.

An Cathaoirleach

Yes. It is up to Senator Fitzsimons. It is 7.45 p.m. and I should be calling Senator Fitzsimons but if he would be so kind as to give the Senator a few minutes and if Senator O'Shea wanted to make a comment——

Mr. Fitzsimons

I will facilitate the House. I am prepared to waive my right to reply and to divide the time between Senator O'Shea and Senator Byrne.

Mr. Byrne

I would like to thank the Minister for his very comprehensive contribution to the report on the scheme to date. I have been encouraged by the many comments in his statement tonight. It is a very worthwhile scheme. I will not waste time in repeating what has been said by Members on both sides of the House.

I am being parochial when I speak about south Tipperary. A number of applications have been made. One was made sometime ago by Clonmel Corporation and the Minister received a deputation last year. We hope that when the scheme is extended the Minister will bear in mind that they have put a very worthwhile case forward. It is a beautiful and very historic town. Carrick-on-Suir Urban Council have put forward an application and also the historic town of Cashel.

It is an excellent scheme and the Minister's approach is very constructive and worthwhile. If the moneys allocated this year and last year are an indication of his commitment to the scheme it will help to preserve the beautiful buildings around the country and the generations to come will read the history of this great land of ours and what happened in our humble little towns and villages. It is an excellent scheme and I compliment the Minister and his Department and also the previous Minister. I appeal to the Minister not to forget the three small towns in south Tipperary when he is extending the scheme.

An Cathaoirleach

Before I call Senator O'Shea, in regard to the final comments of the Minister for the Environment, I am sure he knows the next towns to which he will give the benefit of this urban renewal programme.

Mr. O'Shea

First, I would like to express my gratitude to Senator Fitzsimons for facilitating me. I want to make two brief comments to the Minister. In his speech he stated that he has to be satisfied that further designations will not adversely affect the progress being achieved in those towns which have already been identified. I ask the Minister to apply himself, in terms of further designation, to seaside resorts. I would like to instance specifically what has happened in Tramore. A company called Tramore Fáilte were set up by Bord Fáilte some 20 years ago for the development of the resort. They employed consultants at that time and a plan was drawn up. A great deal of the development proposed then has been carried out. Recently Tramore Fáilte again commissioned consultants because after 20 years the market requirements change. Our climate is a factor that has to be taken into account. Having had discussions with people from overseas and so on it appears that indoor facilities need to be provided in seaside resorts, specifically aquatic indoor facilities, not so much swimming pools but waterchutes and so on.

I believe that a number of our major resorts around the country are in need of a facelift. Not alone have Tramore Fáilte got their consultant's plan but there is one major private developer who has a planning application before Waterford County Council for very substantial residential development. This company are also investing in Waterford Airport. It will be very much in their interest to develop that airport and their market will primarily be the UK market south of London. A certain amount of private capital has been attracted so far but further designation of the town as an area for redevelopment would greatly enhance and speed up the process which is already underway at this stage.

I ask the Minister to look at the possibility of extending the designated areas to seaside resorts. This Government are rightly putting a lot of emphasis on tourism. It is seen as a major growth area in job creation and this type of help to our seaside resorts would attract more tourists, create jobs and get them done more speedily.

The Minister did not refer to what is happening in Waterford. This struck me as a bit odd. In Waterford an £18 million shopping development is going ahead in the city towards the end of March. Very special problems arose in Waterford city which related to very important archaeological remains which were discovered in the city. Archaeological digs were necessary. Much negotiation had to be carried out with the developer and with the Office of Public Works so that important aspects of archaeological interest could be retained in the overall development of the shopping centre. Thankfully, we seem to be coming to the end of our problems. They were not great problems when one looks at York in the UK where the city was run down in the early sixties and the core of the city was badly in need of refurbishment. They got the formula right; the mixture of modern first-class shopping and archaeological and historical remains properly presented. This has resulted in York becoming the tourist capital of Britain after London. They have a throughput of three million tourists per year. I have seen recently that they are encountering problems with archaeological remains because there are not sufficient funds available for archaeological digs and important remains are being covered over. They hope future generations will carry out the excavation.

When archaeological remains are found in city centre areas an added burden is put on the local authorities because archaeological digs, the cataloguing of material and so on are very expensive. This is an area the Minister's Department could look at in terms of making some funding available where important archaeological and historical remains are located. This certainly has proved to be an obstacle to the speedier development of the Waterford project.

In essence, the designation of areas in the major urban towns introduced by the previous Government and extended by this Government is very welcome We are seeing very good results. I ask the Minister to look at our seaside resorts because I believe that their designation as areas for development will add greatly to the amenities and facilities of our own population and, on the other side, help to attract many more tourists to our shores thus increasing employment. After all, tourism is an 8 per cent growth area in the Community: we have not hit a figure like that yet.

Question put and agreed to.

An Cathaoirleach

When is it proposed to sit again?

Mr. S. Haughey

It is proposed to sit at 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.